as the cajun said a change has to happen in the sunbelt. they have to have 8 all sports schools. before very long a number of schools will have to go 1aa in football. at least 3 or 4 from mac. 1 or 2 from sunbelt. possibly 1 or 2 from cusa. once this happens a realignment will have to happen. hopefully we will end up with 1 less conference.. and the survivers will be stronger and more regional. This will make for better rivals and less travel expense.

I've been meaning to say what I"m about to say for a looong time: it's not the conferences that are the problem but rather the individual schools themselves with their idiotic out of conference scheduling. How come UCF plays Arizona State at Arizona State and doesn't do a home and home with Southern Miss? How come Tulane will play Texas @ Texas and not even bother to play La. Tech?? See what I"m getting at here? There can be some better rivalries if teams scheduled better out of conference, and dropped the "body bag" games.

I've been meaning to say what I"m about to say for a looong time: it's not the conferences that are the problem but rather the individual schools themselves with their idiotic out of conference scheduling. How come UCF plays Arizona State at Arizona State and doesn't do a home and home with Southern Miss? How come Tulane will play Texas @ Texas and not even bother to play La. Tech?? See what I"m getting at here? There can be some better rivalries if teams scheduled better out of conference, and dropped the "body bag" games.

The "body bag" games are necessary to bring needed revenue to the athletic department. Our coach wants to do just what you're suggesting, but at this time we can't afford to do without the revenue. If fans get fired up about the Sun Belt and attend conference games, then the body bag games can be eliminated.

McNeese State is 1-AA but in consecutive years they have scheduled one game against the likes of Miami, Texas A&M, Nebraska, and this year Kansas State. Their fans don't support the other revenue producing sport, basketball, so football has to pick up the tab.

I've been meaning to say what I"m about to say for a looong time: it's not the conferences that are the problem but rather the individual schools themselves with their idiotic out of conference scheduling. How come UCF plays Arizona State at Arizona State and doesn't do a home and home with Southern Miss? How come Tulane will play Texas @ Texas and not even bother to play La. Tech?? See what I"m getting at here? There can be some better rivalries if teams scheduled better out of conference, and dropped the "body bag" games.

I personally think the Sunbelt is gonna come out or realignment alot stronger. Weather it is a combination of CUSA and WAC dying or just the WAC the sunbelt will be better I could only see Rice and SMU coming into the Belt though if other mid level teams come. Say Louisville and Cincy leave CUSA and that Fresno Hawaii and Boise leave WAC. Here is what I see forming the southern CUSA schools Tulane SMU RICE TCU Southern Miss ULL North Texas La Tech Arkansas State Memphis Middle Tennesse State Tulsa. This would be a good league not BCS but equal to the current WAC and better than the SBC. Would also cut down on travel expenses.

That could happen, but, if it does, add UAB, USF, UCF - the sunbelt will survive - not completely intact, but reasonably intact.
And that's okay - if all the teams are in 1 league and the rest drop out, who is there to play ooc.

Florida A&M, Florida-International and Florida-Atlantic to the Sunbelt. Maybe Western Kentucky moves up and Joins Them.

Florida International and Western Kentucky have standing invitations to join the Sun Belt in football if they move to 1-A.

The SBC presidents better think long and hard about adding two more brand spanking-new 1-A schools, especially since we are committed to FIU and WKU.

At what point in time does a new conference quit acting as the Mayflower for all 1-A newbies and try to elevate the members it already has to a higher level?

This league is not strong enough to carry new 1-As on its back. I would say the chances are pretty good that the 1-A schools will have to re-align in another conference arrangement. If the Sun Belt survives in 1-A football, it will probably be a lot different than it is now.

Last edited by californiacajun on Mon Aug 11, 2003 2:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

IMO, the SunBelt may survive by virtue of having members that would be among the last one's picked during all this realignment shuffling. Much depends on who moves first, and whether or not that move was done in concert with another conference. Like the WAC, they're geographically spread out and lend themselves to a two-division format. Since the WAC (according to most everyone) appears likely to lose members on its western front, the remaining schools may find it easier to join an established league than form a new one. Dont be surprised to see a new SWC emerge from all this, however.

Critical issues for the SunBelt...
- Fate of the MAC: A healthier conference that may lose too many members courtesy of 1-A standards (KSU, EMU, Ball St.) and/or defection (Marshall, UCF). If this conference is around, it may prove more attractive to Temple, ECU (if CUSA is defunct) and could lure MTSU.

- CUSA's response to the BE: Popular theory is rebuild as SEC lite, since the schools likely to leave would be the northern contingent. If they pull Marshall & UCF from the MAC, they could remain strong enough to fend off losses to the WAC and possibly raid the SunBelt.

If this league is disbanded to allow the western schools to examine a SWC formation, there would fewer schools in the southeast to maintain a league, and thus they look to the SunBelt.

Last edited by gunnerfan on Tue Aug 12, 2003 12:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

my thoughts on the wac are that it is too far-flung and lacks a core of rivalries. i was watching a fox sports west broadcast in october when the fresno-la tech game was discussed and the announcers made some ridiculous statement like "it's always a war when these two meet." excuse me? how many times have they played each other? there's no history there, and the lack of a uniting force and traditional rivalries makes it subject to downsizing unless something changes. like the performance of all but the top 3 or 4 teams.

Sbro, the WAC does have some traditional rivalries. You make it sound like there are no traditional rivalries whatsoever which is not true. SMU and Rice have been playing each other for a very loooong time. Fresno State has long-standing rivalries with San Jose State and Hawaii. I think those are pretty good core rivalries from which to build from. Also, you discount the fact that new rivalries form in conferences that have had a change in membership. It takes time for these rivalries to develop though.

Quote:

in the end, i'd like to see la tech move to the sun belt and idaho to the wac. that's a start.

I would not want to see la tech in the sun belt. LTU has made it perfectly clear they want nothing to do with the 'belt whatsoever. Idaho would be good for the WAC though.

The MAC will be fine because even though several schools failed to average 15,000 a game last year, 8 or 9 of them did.

What happens with Louisiana Tech will probably depend on economics. They consented to play Louisiana again because they needed an affordable opponent. Their future in the WAC must include divisional play to cut down on expenses. It wouldn't hurt if Hawaii defected to the Mountain West. What happens to Louisiana-Monroe in 1-A (i.e. meeting the attendance requirements) may have some influence in whether LTU would consider a revamped Sun Belt with Eastern WAC teams (i.e. New Southwest Conference). The ULM people I visit with on the message boards are really excited about this new coach and the "Louisiana" football helmets he introduced for this season.

Where going to do a geography lessen with business what doe utah st., Idaho and New mexico St have in common the answer is the should not be in the sunbelt. Florida A&M, UCF, Florida Atlantic, Western Kentucky and Florida International do. It cost less to travel and it doesn't cost 300,000 to 500,000 to move a team per game.

_________________The Bear may be dead but he still hates Tennessee. Roll Damn Tide

Where going to do a geography lessen with business what doe utah st., Idaho and New mexico St have in common the answer is the should not be in the sunbelt. Florida A&M, UCF, Florida Atlantic, Western Kentucky and Florida International do. It cost less to travel and it doesn't cost 300,000 to 500,000 to move a team per game.

How true. The Sun Belt commissioner said recently that he couldn't feel sorry for SMU's financial problems if they travel to Hawaii yet won't play North Texas about 30 miles away.

I'd really like to see these conferences realigned in a way that makes geographic sense. It would be the shot in the arm that the fans of these beleaguered teams really need.

footballgod you are correct no doubt they need to drop the western teams along with denver. Add Temple to the list also. Since the sunbelt is a renegade conference keep the image as a renegade conference and when the smoke clears and dust settles they the sunbelt may have the last laugh on them all.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum